Court backs decision to bar Christian foster couple

[hymie]

Should Christians be stopped from fostering because of their faith/belief?

LINK

"Why should the Sexual Orientation Act have precedence over religious belief? This is not tolerance at all. All this couple wanted was a level playing field and they don't have this."

This decision has nothing to do with the 'rights' of adults to be either homosexual or religious with respective beliefs - it is about the right of a child to be looked after by people who do nt use thier own beliefs - whatever they are - to make a child feel alienated, isolated, morally judged or 'sinful'.

The 'right' of adults to get paid to look after other people's children on behalf of other parents or the state are less imprtant that the right of the child to a genuinely tolerant carer.

Really - what right does a an adult paid by the state have to let a child know that they view a normal, natural, common quality of human life as wrong, or use their own personal religious belief to make a child feel that homosexuality is unnacceptable?

Great post Blu.

There is no meaning to the term 'homophobic'. People who might disagree with the homosexual lifestyle do not suffer from a phobia. People are entitled to their beliefs and to believe in what their faith teaches them.

'Homophobia' is a loaded term which is simply used as a stick to beat people with whenenver they may actually express a dislike of that particular lifestyle.

I don't think people should sleep around or take drugs - is there a term for disliking these things? No.

It's not even about hating gays either. I don't hate promiscuous drug users, but I still don't approve of their lifestyle.

It's not even about bigotry either. Bigotry implies hatred and discrimination.

Some people might just not like the homosexual lifestyle and if that's part of their faith, so what? Get over it. Sexual morality involves very personal beliefs and people are entitled to hold those beliefs, both gay and straight people.

People need to change the record.

LLHH - back on planet earth - all children really want is love, attention, and a sense of security. They will never get that being shoved around from placement to placement. We need kind loving people like the Johns to give children this security - and if they gloss over one small issue - so what? Is that reason enough to ban them from giving a child what she needs? - a young child needs love and stability - not a lecture on the rights and wrongs of someones sexuality.

I'd love to meet the people who make these laws - because as far as I'm concerned,

The lunatics really have taken over the asylum

Carmina - this couple were respite carers. Their job was to be part of the being shoved from placement to placement. Security wouldn't come into it.

And can you explain your "back on planet earth" comment please? What exactly makes you think that your point of view is more of this world than mine? Do you even have any experience or knowledge of this area?

ilovemyhens -it is not a lifestyle.(read the thread please)

Why do you equate promiscuity and drug taking with being gay?

Also, how do you know they are kind and loving? For all you know, SS could have used this as a big excuse to get rid of them, as being generally horrible is a lot harder to prove. Just a thought.

well said carminaburana

I grew up with abusive foster parents and I'd have given my eye teeth to have been cared for by people like the Johhs.

People are not solely defined by their sexuality. See Mazlows Hierarchy of Needs - other things come first, and if those are being met whilst in the care system, then you're classed as bloody lucky.

If you look at Maslow ilovehens it has everything to do with self esteem and you will never perform as a human if you cannot be true to yourself (ie, someone denying you basic human needs).

'Why do you equate promiscuity and drug taking with being gay?'

Because these things are ways of expressing your inner being?

I express myself in different ways and so do other people. How people express themselves demonstrates who they are and what they value in life.

ilovemyhens

Whilst it is awful that you had to deal with abusive foster parents, it doesn't mean that someone else has to put up with intolerant foster parents because it is less bad. What we should be doing is ensuring that all foster carers are excellent, surely? I know they all will have their faults, but refusing to put aside their beliefs for the wellbeing of a child is fundamental, and could potentially become abuse of its own.

Also, you are assuming (again) that this couple are perfect in every other way. We have no proof of that.

Did you grow up in the care system scurryfunge?

Believe me, the basics come first, that and not being abused.

This is the real world. A great many foster parents are abusive/neglectful and lets not forget that.

what bollocks, ilmh. You are seriously deluded and offensive if you believe being gay is just another way of expressing yourself in the same way as sleeping around and taking drugs.

Unbelievable.

I'm not trying to claim they're perfect. As you said, all foster parents have flaws, but by the admission of SS, they historically have been good foster parents.

That's just your opinion scurryfunge. Opinions are subjective

At least you are open about your hatred.

I did ilove (grow up in care). In my real world it is still crucial that carers are tolerant, as well as not abusive. We need to weed out all sub-standard foster carers, be it abusive, neglectful and intolerant.
We need to work towards a system that doesn't support substandard care. You are implying that half-way decent is good enough. It isn't.

Sorry, italics went wrong!

Sexuality is a continuum and people place themselves at whatever point on that continuum then their lives progress from that point.

How secure would the average child feel if they were told that they were sinful, and that they were unacceptable?

It may be a small issue to you, but to a child who feels they may be gay, or whose parents are gay, it is not a small issue. How dismissive.

The couple in question were not prepared to "gloss over" the issue. They were prepared to tell a child, that they were sinful. As in going to hell sinful. And we are not talking about teenagers here, but young, distressed, frightened children.

So, which other paid professionals should be allowed to teach your children that they are going to hell? Teachers? Should a Muslim teacher be able to tell your Christian child that they are infidels?

I don't hate anybody I have friends who are gay.

I also work in elderly care and believe me, half way decent would be great

Ah, that old chestnut.

ilovehens -you have just scored on bigot bingo! "I have friends who are gay"

The Johns weren't going to tell the children that they were sinful or going to hell. The stated that they would not approach the subject like this.

and

How many young children do you know that are gay? The Johns may not be suitable to foster pre/teenagers, but what about younger children. You cannot seriously tell me that a six year old is sexually aware enough to know whether or not they're gay?